Why Are Suicide Rates For Many Rising In The USA?

In the United States, suicide is the tenth leading cause of death [1]! According to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, 44,193 Americans die by suicide a year; whereas suicide costs the U.S. $51 Billion annually [1]. Below is a chart indicating “Suicide Rates by Age from 2000 to 2015.”

Many suicide attempts, however, go unreported or untreated. Surveys suggest that at least one million people in the U.S. each year engage in intentionally inflicted self-harm.

Females attempt suicide three times more often than males. As with suicide deaths, rates of attempted suicide vary considerably among demographic groups. While males are 4 times more likely than females to die by suicide, females attempt suicide 3 times as often as males. The ratio of suicide attempts to suicide death in youth is estimated to be about 25:1, compared to about 4:1 in the elderly. [1]

The above information certainly is very disconcerting, especially to me, a consumer health researcher who understands what those demographics portend. Those statistics in the age range 45 to 64 match the age range of 85 and older, all while the middle age range has been going up steadily year after year. Those in the middle age ranges are at a time of life when they should be enjoying the rewards of a life well spent and looking forward to retirement. What’s going on, one has to wonder.

The other noteworthy information from the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention is this:

The ratio of suicide attempts to suicide death in youth is estimated to be about 25:1, compared to about 4:1 in the elderly.

That is most frightening! Youngsters are attempting suicide death at a ratio of 25:1 compared with about 4:1 in the elderly. Something definitely is wrong and, I believe, there are several factors to investigate.

There are two issues probably vying for first place, in my opinion as a consumer health researcher since the late 1970s. They function almost in tandem.

Cause No. 1: SSRIs and Other Mood Altering Drugs MDs Prescribe for Children to deal with and or address ADD, ADHD plus other probable prenatal sonogram/ultrasound cavitation effects, which are totally not necessary due to chemical, environmental and technological exposures most likely caused from exposure in utero [2].

“One of the most concerning for me was a study reported in the journal Epidemiology in 2001 that showed that the chance of subtle brain damage increases dramatically in male babies whose mothers get prenatal ultrasounds.

Doctors have long known that left handedness in a child that is not genetically determined can be an indicator of brain damage. When the rate of left handedness in children rises above 9% for right handed parents and 35% for left handed parents, scientists know that some form of negative impact on neural development has occurred.

“In this study, the rate of left handedness for boys increased by 30% above historical genetic rates when a mother was exposed to prenatal ultrasound. The incidence of left handedness was especially pronounced for mothers who had received more than one prenatal scan.

Left handedness has been increasing in recent decades and this puzzling rise beyond normal and historical genetic rates could very well be related to the common use of prenatal ultrasound. The fetus’ brain undergoes critical brain development even very late in pregnancy (preterm babies are 5 times more likely to be left handed). Moreoever, the brain of a male fetus develops at a slower rate than that of a female leaving boys at particular risk for ultrasonic injury.

“The Ultrasound/Speech Delay Link

Another study that gave me pause and eventually persuaded me to opt out of all forms of ultrasound – even use of the doppler, was a study in 1993 and reported in the Canadian Medical Association Journal. This study examined 72 children ages 2-8 who were suffering from speech delay of unknown cause. These speechdelay children were twice as likely as a control group to have been exposed to ultrasound in the womb.

Delayed speech is a likely indicator of sub-optimal conditions for development during gestation and ultrasound exposure seems to be linked to these less than ideal conditions for the fetus.

“HowWouldUltrasound Delay Speech?

Ultrasound as a potential reason for the increase in pediatric speech problems in recent years has a very likely cause. This cause would be the incredible loudness that is produced in the womb as the ultrasound waves bounce around the uterus.

Can you imagine the intense fright and the spike in stress hormones the baby experiences from an ultrasound not to mention the likelihood of damage to the little developing ears from 100-120 decibel ultrasound waves?

“Oh, and by the way, hearing loss begins with exposure to sound at only 90-95 decibels, much LOWER than the sound the baby would hear from a routine ultrasound or a doppler heartbeat check.

“Beware Continuous Electronic Fetal Monitoring During Labor

A favorite way for a hospital to monitor how baby is handling the stress of Mom’s labor is by strapping an electronic fetal monitor to her belly. Be aware that this device is ultrasound and when it is strapped to your body, your poor child is not only enduring the stress of the birth process itself but also dealing with 100-120 decibel continuous, blaring sound at the same time!

I have no doubt that someday a study will finally be done that shows that babies that are subjected to the barbaric insult of electronic fetal monitoring during birth have more speech delay and brain damage induced left handedness than any control groups.

“Just say no to electronic fetal monitoring and if your hospital or OB tries to talk you into the so called “benefits” of this practice, then find another OB! Better yet, have your baby with a midwife at home or in a birthing center where such devices are never allowed through the front door.” [2]

The late, great pediatrician and colleague, Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, MD, [3] often warned me of the problems and dangers regarding prenatal ultrasound, which he said caused cavitation within the developing brain and central nervous system, and which he predicted would lead to a generation or more of emotionally disturbed and sick children.

Melissa Dykes of Truthstream Media found some older documented information regarding testimony on MK Ultra and the 1960s Project Pandora where radar was beamed at monkeys to make them go to sleep. Was that a precursor of microwave energy non-thermal waves (electromagnetic radiation) studies in monkeys done in Project Pandora?

Melissa uncovered more of the research done on transferring human consciousness in this video. Is any of this starting to make sense as to why all this assault and battery regarding electromagnetic frequencies is going on, especially since the human central nervous system is an electrical system [5]?

To the above must be added prenatal vaccines given to pregnant mothers, followed by baby’s immediate vaccination with the Hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth plus numerous neurotoxic vaccines baby receives at 2, 4 and 6-month ‘well baby visits’ which result in an infant’s neurological system being impacted by neurotoxic chemicals. Do those neurotoxic chemicals have impact upon the younger generations’ suicide attempt rates?

What is it the medical profession doesn’t want to understand about putting all those hazmat [6] chemicals and neurotoxins into an infant whose immune system will not be fully developed until between 2 and 3 years of age? The end result is an impaired immune system and a damaged neurological system, which the medical profession compromises further with antidepressant pharmaceutical drugs being given to younger and younger children.

I defy real objective science, not “consensus pharmaceutical science,” to prove that a less than 25 pound baby can detoxify all the toxic chemicals pumped into his or her tiny body within 180 days of birth, especially when most body organs and systems are not fully functional and/or developed optimally for several years after birth or, as with the brain, until around 20 to 25 years of age!

Furthermore, a sort of wild card metabolic syndrome also needs to be factored in to preclude vaccine damage, which the FDA and medicine will not allow to be done before giving vaccines to infants, and that is: mitochondrial proclivities and deficiencies discovered via PCR (polymerase chain reaction) testing [4] that could predict and even prevent vaccine adverse results from occurring in children who should not be vaccinated.

Cause No. 2: Electromagnetic Frequencies emitted by microwave technology and the devices run by microwaves, e.g., cell and smart phones, Wi-Fi in schools and the workplace, and the ever-escalating mandated presence of AMI Smart Meters on homes that pump dirty electricity onto homes’ electrical wiring and interfering with sleep patterns.

Loving parents in their desires for attending to baby’s welfare often use baby monitors, which emit huge amounts of EMFs thereby compromising baby’s brain and other bodily organs, as those EMFs are not safe! See Dr. Magda Havas’ (PhD) information about Baby Monitors, and to learn there are safer baby monitors to use.

Never give a toddler a smart phone or laptop computer to play with! Adults really don’t understand the amounts of electromagnetic waves penetrating children’s vulnerable size brains and bodies.

Om Gandhi (University of Utah) shows how radiation penetrates the skull of an adult (25%), 10 year old (50%) and a 5 year old (75%). The younger the child the deeper the penetration due to the fact that their skulls are thinner and still developing. Bone marrow in a child’s skull absorbs 10 times more microwave radiation than does an adult. www.environmentalhealthtrust.org [7]

One of the most egregious EMF assaults on children of all ages is Wi-Fi in schools, which expose children and teachers to serious microwave energies. Do you know the typical range of Wi-Fi networks? This article explains a lot, but I would never recommend upgrading to have a ‘better’ capacity Wi-Fi in my home. Wi-Fi is comparable to leaving your microwave oven door open while the unit is cooking dinner but with one exception—those Wi-Fi router waves saturate and penetrate the entire house, just not the kitchen, including everyone in it: adults, kids, and pets!

Lastly, have you ever thought about what happens to your face when you talk on a cell phone? This illustration indicates the thermal effect your face receives.

Source: [7]

One of the questions cell phone users need to ask themselves is this: What skin or other cancer-causing possibilities will thermal effects have on my face? However, there are even more frightening probabilities to consider: non-thermal radiation waves and consequential health issues, which the microwave industry, cell phone industry, FCC and states public utilities commissions deny exist. How ludicrous and unscientific, when 32 percent of microwave industry funded studies actually documented non-thermal wave adverse effects. Denying they exist, when they found 32 percent, is indicative of consensus scientific fraud and should be prosecuted legally at all levels of involvement.

All those high tech microwave-run gadgets we can’t seem to live without may be more of a determining factor in the U.S. suicide rate than we apparently know. Furthermore, there IS scientific proof.

Such EMFs act via activation of VGCCs [voltage-gated calcium channels], acting through the VGCC voltage sensor which is predicted to be exquisitely sensitive to these EMFs (Pall, 2015). VGCCs occur in high densities throughout the nervous system and have essential roles throughout the nervous system in releasing neurotransmitters and neuroendocrine hormones.

EGCC activity, produced by an allete of the CACNAIC gene which encodes the channel of the main L-type VGCC in the brain, produces various neuropsychiatric effects (Table 1). This predicts, that low intensity non-thermal microwave frequency EMFs which also produce elevated L-type and other VGCC activity, therefore produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects.

Studies Elevated reviewed in the Tolgskaya and Gordon, 1973 publication (Table 2) have shown that the cells of the mammalian nervous system show high sensitivity to various non-thermal microwave and lower frequency EMFs, being, apparently more sensitive than any other organ in the body of the rodents. These studies predict that the human nervous system is likely to be similarly sensitive to these EMFs, predicting, therefore, widespread neuropsychiatric effects in humans.

Consumers, parents in particular, must take seriously the research vested-interest industries, especially the U.S. government and military use, to reprogram human consciousness that consumers inadvertently have bought into by falling in love with and becoming addicted to ‘smart’ apps, phones and appliances.